It's time to officially Pit Joe Paterno and the Penn State football program.

[Lamar_Mundane]

@etv78

How will this effect JoePa’s legacy? Would it matter if he were alive?

This decision really didn’t do much for Paterno’s legacy one way or another. He and his legacy will be torn to shreds in the civil cases that are coming against Penn State. They will be charged with a deliberate lack of oversight, and Paterno will be a key, if not the key figure in those cases.

[not_what_you_d_expect]

@Guinastasia

According to Amendola, he didn’t testify because he was under a gag order – is that possible? I would think that your right to defend yourself would over ride that.

That’s not quite what he said. The gag order was why he couldn’t explain sooner that Jerry would not testify after all. The reason Jerry didn’t testify is because of the son claiming molestation. He said the prosecution held Matt over their head.

I’m relieved that Sandusky was found guilty.

[Loach]

@not_what_you_d_expect

That’s not quite what he said. The gag order was why he couldn’t explain sooner that Jerry would not testify after all. The reason Jerry didn’t testify is because of the son claiming molestation. He said the prosecution held Matt over their head.

I’m relieved that Sandusky was found guilty.

I didn’t catch that. Did he mean that the prosecutor was going to use the son as a rebuttal witness?

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

Impeachment, more likely.

[Cartooniverse]

They say he is on a suicide watch.

If it was me, I’d stop watching.

Speck of shit.

[not_what_you_d_expect]

@Loach

I didn’t catch that. Did he mean that the prosecutor was going to use the son as a rebuttal witness?

I think so, yes.

Now the attorneys are claiming they wanted to leave the case, but the judge wouldn’t allow it.

[Ike_Witt]

I am curious to know how his wife reacted to the verdict. Also, how long will it be before the focus shifts to her? Kids abused in their home and their own son? Something is really fishy there.

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

@Ike_Witt

I am curious to know how his wife reacted to the verdict. Also, how long will it be before the focus shifts to her? Kids abused in their home and their own son? Something is really fishy there.

None so blind as those who will not see.

[Sampiro]

@Cartooniverse

They say he is on a suicide watch.

If it was me, I’d stop watching.

Speck of shit.

He had all the opportunity to kill himself while he was out free on bond. If he’d done it before the verdict came in, it might have spared his family a tiny amount of humiliation and even given some small closure to his victims. Now I would say keep him from it because it’s way too easy.

[RaftPeople]

@Ike_Witt

I am curious to know how his wife reacted to the verdict. Also, how long will it be before the focus shifts to her? Kids abused in their home and their own son? Something is really fishy there.

One of the victims said she walked in on them in a hotel room bathroom - seems like she must have known.

[drastic_quench]

Sandusky’s wife should be charged with perjury at minimum.

[Gyrate]

Thus spake Rodney Erickson, in an email to alumni:

Yesterday Penn State learned that a verdict was reached in the case of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Gerald Sandusky. Mr. Sandusky was found guilty of 45 of the 48 charges filed against him.

The legal process has spoken and we have tremendous respect for the men who came forward to tell their stories publicly. No verdict can undo the pain and suffering caused by Mr. Sandusky, but we do hope this judgment helps the victims and their families along their path to healing.

My administration and the Board of Trustees maintain a steadfast commitment to pursuing the truth regarding Mr. Sandusky’s actions. While we cannot change what happened, we can and do accept the responsibility to take action on the societal issue of child sexual abuse—both in our community and beyond. The University is committed to ensuring that our campuses are safe for children and to being a constructive participant in building greater awareness of child sexual abuse and the practical steps that can be undertaken to prevent, report and respond to such abuse.
The University has already established a confidential counseling process for victims of Mr. Sandusky’s conduct, and that process remains open. (For further information, please visit http://live.psu.edu/story/58590.) While counseling is critical, some victims have sought and continue to seek a direct dialogue with the University to discuss the University’s responsibility for Mr. Sandusky’s actions.

Now that the jury has spoken, the University wants to continue that dialogue and do its part to help victims continue their path forward. To that end, the University plans to invite victims of Mr. Sandusky’s abuse to participate in a program to facilitate the resolution of claims against the University arising out of Mr. Sandusky’s conduct. The purpose of the program is simple—the University wants to provide a forum where the University can privately, expeditiously and fairly address the victims’ concerns and compensate them for claims relating to the University. Counsel to the University plan to reach out to counsel to the victims of Mr. Sandusky’s abuse in the near future with additional details.

Reading between the lines, Penn State’s lawyers have said “Get out the checkbooks and write until your hands fall off; the best you can hope for is to keep the civil cases out the courts and the newspapers.”

[R.P.McMurphy]

@Gyrate

Thus spake Rodney Erickson, in an email to alumni:Reading between the lines, Penn State’s lawyers have said “Get out the checkbooks and write until your hands fall off; the best you can hope for is to keep the civil cases out the courts and the newspapers.”

I think you’ve about summed it up in as few words as possible. This article is quite good:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-06-23/news/sns-rt-us-usa-crime-sandusky-civilbre85m0ka-20120623_1_civil-suits-schultz-face-charges-tim-curley

From the artiticle:

The move is a sign Penn State is willing to stay away from the “usual pattern of deny, delay, defend – the ‘three Ds’ of corporate insurance defense,”

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

OTOH, the McQueary charge was one that the jury did not convict on, which speaks well for Curley’s and Schultz’s chances in their trials.

Same would apply to JP, were it relevant.

[Guinastasia]

@Cartooniverse

They say he is on a suicide watch.

If it was me, I’d stop watching.

Speck of shit.

Naw, death is too good for the bastard. I’d rather see him rot for a long, long time.

[Zakalwe]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

OTOH, the McQueary charge was one that the jury did not convict on, which speaks well for Curley’s and Schultz’s chances in their trials.

Same would apply to JP, were it relevant.

Not sure how you get there. Curley and Schultz are charged with a failure to report and perjury IIRC. The ultimate truthfullness of the thing they were required to report/testify about is meaningless. The question will become whether or not a “reasonable person” would have believed that some abuse that hit the required erporting threshold had happened. That’s a MUCH lower bar than “beyond a reasonable doubt” and, in this particular case IMHO is a slam-dunk “YES!!!”.

[Ian_D.Bergkamp]

@Fotheringay-Phipps

OTOH, the McQueary charge was one that the jury did not convict on, which speaks well for Curley’s and Schultz’s chances in their trials.

Same would apply to JP, were it relevant.

To be clear, there were five counts related to Victim 2, who was the subject of McQueary’s testimony, and the jury found Sandusky guilty on four of them (three misdemeanors and one felony), so I don’t think that speaks well at all for Curley or Schultz (or Paterno, for that matter).

The jury did find Sandusky not guilty on count 7–involuntary deviate sexual intercouse–presumably because, without the testimony of Victim 2, who was never located, the prosecution could not prove the intercourse was involuntary. I’m just guessing on that, though.

[The_Man_In_Black]

@I'm Not Dennis Bergkamp

The jury did find Sandusky not guilty on count 7–involuntary deviate sexual intercouse–presumably because, without the testimony of Victim 2, who was never located, the prosecution could not prove the intercourse was involuntary. I’m just guessing on that, though.

Um, I am not sure it would make a difference if it was voluntary. In the US, it is illegal to have sex with 10 year olds even if you think they want it.

[Ian_D.Bergkamp]

Of course, and that was covered in the other four counts involving Victim 2. The count on which Sandusky was found not guilty, however, does require that the sex be non-consensual. That’s just the way that particular statute is worded. You can read the relevant Pennsylvania code section here.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

@I'm Not Dennis Bergkamp

To be clear, there were five counts related to Victim 2, who was the subject of McQueary’s testimony, and the jury found Sandusky guilty on four of them (three misdemeanors and one felony), so I don’t think that speaks well at all for Curley or Schultz (or Paterno, for that matter).

The jury did find Sandusky not guilty on count 7–involuntary deviate sexual intercouse–presumably because, without the testimony of Victim 2, who was never located, the prosecution could not prove the intercourse was involuntary. I’m just guessing on that, though.

I think you’re probably guessing wrong. Sandusky was found guilty of “involuntary deviate sexual intercourse” WRT Victim 8 who was also not present to testify (he was the one observed by the janitor).

The jury reviewed McQueary’s and Dranov’s testimony in the jury room, and I would guess that their verdict reflected some uncertainty over McQueary’s testimony to the extent that he appeared to contradict Dranov, which does bode well for the others. (For Victim 2, he was convicted of “indecent assault, unlawful contact with minor, corruption of minors, endangering a child’s welfare” - see http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/i-team/jerry-sandusky-guilty-victims-a-breakdown-counts-jury-found-guilty-article-1.1101164.)